By Ryan Boonstra
Senior Editor, 2018-2019
In November of 2018 nearly 20,000 Google employees staged a walk out of the company to protest the company’s sexual harassment policy.[1] The walk out came in response to a build up of unsatisfied sexual harassment claims and the reveling of a multi-million-dollar payout to a Google executive accused of such harassment.[2] In response, Google’s CEO promised to “double down on [its] commitment to be a representative, equitable, and respectful workplace” by revamping the company’s sexual harassment policies.[3] It appears Google was not bluffing. The company ended its mandatory arbitration policy regarding sexual harassment and sexual assault claims.[4]
However, the company was not done there either. In February of 2019, Google joined several other companies by ending their mandatory arbitration policy for all employees.[5] This came after a large number of employees formed the Googlers for Ending Forced Arbitration whose purpose is obvious from the name.[6] Now any employee at Google can individually sue the company for any employment issue they are facing.[7]
Both the #MeToo movement and Googlers for Ending Forced Arbitration have considered these changes to be monumental, but it is yet to be seen if employees are more protected now.[8] Forced employment arbitration creates a lack of accountability and publicity for the company involved.[9] There are positives to arbitration though including lesser cost, confidentiality, and flexibility.[10] Most of the criticisms of forced employment arbitration are not criticisms of arbitration itself but criticisms of the fact that the arbitration is forced and the company gets to decide the details and process.[11] Google’s new approach is being praised because they allow the employee to choose between arbitration or litigation giving the employee the freedom to best suit their needs.[12]
The attention surrounding Google’s move has brought more attention to a current bill in Congress aimed at eliminating forced arbitration.[13] “The Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal (“FAIR”) Act, would eliminate mandatory arbitration from employee and consumer contracts.”[14] Further, the FAIR Act will also invalidate forced arbitration clauses for current agreements; essentially grandfathering in all persons stuck in agreements with forced arbitration.[15] It is unlikely that a bill like this would pass, but it currently has 155 co-sponsors, far more than previous bills aimed at combatting forced arbitration.[16] Only time will tell how large of an impact Google’s move will have, but the company’s size and reputation certainly sends a message.
[1] See Nisha Verma & Jessica Linehan, 3 Takeaways From Google’s Harassment Policy Overhaul, Law360 (Nov. 14, 2018), https://www.law360.com/articles/1101336/3-takeaways-from-google-s-harassment-policy-overhaul.
[2] See id.
[3] See id.
[4] See id.
[5] See Alexia Campbell, Google Employees Fought for Their Right to Sue the Company — and Won, Vox (February 22, 2019), https://www.vox.com/technology/2019/2/22/18236172/mandatory-forced-arbitration-google-employees.
[6] See id.
[7] See id.
[8] See Nisha Verma, supra note 1; see also Alexia Campbell, supra note 5.
[9] See Molly O’Casey, A Movement Is Born? Google Eliminates Mandatory Arbitration, 37 ALTHCL 60, 62 (2019).
[10] See id.
[11] See generally id.; See Nisha Verma, supra note 1; see Alexia Campbell, supra note 5.
[12] See Molly O’Casey, supra note 9.
[13] See id. at 61.
[14] See id.
[15] See id.
[16] See id.